CNN is running a story about the history of State backed sterilization for people living the US, something like 60k people went under the surgery. Seems they had a list or disorders that were targeted, like those in a mental hospital or are retarded, epilepsy, insanity.. etc

This is horrible. But when you hear the victims talking, you start to see why it may not have been as crazy as it sounded.. One guy had a measured IQ of 51.

It’s like people fighting to legalize weed. There are medical benefits after all, but when the people fighting look like a bunch of hippies.. it doesn’t look like a great idea anymore.

This is a eugenics thing, right? I can understand why we would want to improve the genetic composition of the population. However, mandatory sterilization is clearly a controversial practice. So instead, I propose “reverse sterilization” of people with desirable genetic traits. All men who pass certain criteria (IQ or education) should be rounded up. Then, these people should be made to have sex with as many women volunteers as possible. This would be a patriotic duty for both the men and the women.

Due to anatomical reasons, the ratio of men to women needs to be very low. Also, the population of people with desirable traits should focus on men, since it’s easier for men than for women to have multiple… mating partners. To save time, I propose that sessions include multiple women paired with one man.

Once again, this vision is based on purely scientific and practical reasons. I will personally volunteer for the first round of male screening, even though this would be at great personal inconvenience.

“Making profit is important, but it is not more important than being tolerant and understanding towards others.” -klara

I’m really hesitant to respond, but I can see both sides. I mean, if someone’s spending their life on welfare, clearly unable to support themselves and they want to have several kids to top it off, that’s just stupid and irresponsible. It just dumps an additional welfare burden on everyone else. I would say that you put thresholds in place, like if you’re on welfare for more than 5 straight years, asked to either 1) be sterilized, or 2) give up the welfare. If you have a kid before the 5 year mark on welfare, that’s fine, you keep your kid, but then at that point you’re given the choice above. So nothing’s forced, you’re given an option to either receive free money for the rest of your life or raise a family.

Now I realize it quickly gets a lot more complicated than that, so I’m not advocating this plan of action, I’m just saying there is some sense societal justice to the concept.

On the other hand, you run into questions like “Who are we to say that one lifestyle is unnacceptable or better than another?” and the opposing “Who are they to say they deserve to have kids and we should pay to raise them while struggling to raise our own families?”

No, the supply of men and women needs to be kept similar. If men are allowed to reproduce with multiple partners simultaneously, then alpha males will take up a disproportionate share of mating partners. Leaving armies of angry beta males.

Like me.

I don’t think Ohai’s plan is as fun as it sounds to him. His “seed” could be harvested clinically and distributed to women in that fashion.

I think an alpha male society would be horrible to live in. Can you imagine all day long all you tried to do was one-up the next guy, except now the next guy is now every. single. other. guy.

I say we breed all women to look like supermodels. So once every guy has one they won’t be so special anymore.

Go to a country like sweden and you will see this is the case. Everyone there thinks being blue eyed and blonde is boring. They want to sleep with Africans because its cool and exotic. If you are swarthy book a flight to scandanavia.